The most renowned Bible characters were polygamists. Abraham had two

wives, and when he died the Lord said, "Abraham obeyed my voice,

and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws"

(Gen. xxvi, 6).

Jacob was a polygamist, and after he had secured four wives and

concubines, God blessed him and said, "Be fruitful and multiply"

(Gen. xxxv, 11).

Gideon had "many wives" (Jud. viii, 30), and it was to him an angel

came and said, "The Lord is with thee" (Jud. vi, 12).

David had a score of wives and concubines, and "David was a man after

God's own heart;" "David did right in the eyes of the Lord." God

himself said to David, "I delivered thee out of the hands of Saul;

and I gave thee thy master's house and thy master's wives" (2 Sam. xii,

7, 8).

"And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much,

and largeness of heart"--sufficient to hold a thousand wives and

concubines.

Many years ago the Mormon, Orson Pratt, wrote a defense of polygamy,

based upon the Bible. A noted lawyer of New York sent a copy of it

to the Rev. Dr. W. B. Sprague with the interrogation, "Can you answer

this?" Back came the frank reply, "No; can you?"

It is claimed that the New Testament is opposed to polygamy. It is

not. William Ellery Channing says:

"There is no prohibition of polygamy in the New Testament. It is an

indisputable fact that although Christianity was first preached in

Asia, which had been from the earliest ages the seat of polygamy,

the Apostles never denounced it as a crime, and never required their

converts to put away all wives but one."

Elizabeth Cady Stanton says: "It was at a Jewish polygamous wedding

that Jesus performed his first miracle, and polygamy was practiced

by Christians for centuries."

It is true that many primitive Christians did not practice

polygamy. And why? Because Pagan Greece and Rome had taught them

better. It was to them, and not to their Scriptures, that they were

indebted for the monogamic system of marriage. The Roman Catholic

church did not generally sustain polygamy; but it did sustain a

system of concubinage which was certainly as bad. For centuries the

keeping of concubines was almost universal among the Catholic clergy,

one abbot keeping no less than seventy.

The founders of the Protestant church, however, accepting the Bible

as their guide, attaching to it a degree of authority which had

never been attached to it before, were candid and consistent enough

to admit the validity of the institution. Referring to this subject,

Sir William Hamilton, a Christian and a Protestant, says:

"As to polygamy in particular, which not only Luther, Melanchthon,

and Bucer, the three leaders of the German Reformation, speculatively

adopted, but to which above a dozen distinguished divines among the

Reformers stood formally committed" (Discussions on Philosophy and

Literature).

Speaking of Luther and Melanchthon, Hamilton says:

"They had both promulgated opinions in favor of polygamy, to the

extent of vindicating to the spiritual minister a right of private

dispensation, and to the temporal magistrate the right of establishing

the practice if he chose by public law" (Ibid).

In accordance with these views, John of Leydon, a zealous Protestant,

established polygamy at Munster, and murdered or drove from their

homes all who dared to oppose the odious custom. Other Protestants

followed his example.

On the 19th of December, 1539, at Wittenberg, Luther and Melanchthon

drew up the famous "Consilium," authorizing the landgrave, Philip

of Hesse, to have a plurality of wives. This instrument bears

the signatures of Martin Luther, Philip Melanchthon, Martin Bucer,

Dionysius Melander, John Lening, Antony Corvinus, Adam Kraft, Justus

Winther, and Balthasar Raida, nine of the leading Protestant divines

of Germany.

It is a well-known fact that Luther advised Henry VIII. to adopt

polygamy in his case, but by divorcing two wives, and murdering two

more, the founder of the English church avoided it.

The advocacy of polygamy by the chief Reformers prevented Ferdinand

I. from declaring for the Reformation. The German princes, too,

generally opposed it; and this opposition, coupled with the fact that

the most licentious sects espoused it, finally caused a reaction in

favor of monogamy.

Protestants, it ill became you to point the finger of scorn at the

Mormons of Utah. Yet with characteristic consistency you were demanding

the suppression of polygamy in the territories, while at the same time

you were endeavoring to have the whole country accept as infallible

authority a book which sanctions the pernicious custom. Make the Bible

the fundamental law of the land, as you demand, and polygamy will

become, in theory at least, a national instead of a local institution.

CHAPTER XXX.

ADULTERY--OBSCENITY.

Adultery.

I refuse to accept the Bible as a moral guide because it sanctions

adultery and prostitution.

Adultery is made prominent by the recital of the numerous adulteries

of Abraham, Lot, Jacob, Judah, Samson, David, and other Bible saints,

and sanctified by the approved adulteries of Abraham and Jacob.

Both Abraham and Isaac were willing to sell the virtue of their wives

to save themselves from harm.

Two instances are recorded of fathers having offered their own

daughters to gratify the lust of a sensual mob, and these abominable

acts are represented as especially meritorious. Read the nineteenth

chapter of Genesis and the nineteenth chapter of Judges; dwell upon

the eighth verse of the former and the twenty-fourth verse of the

latter; and then, if you can indorse the spirit of these narratives,

you are unfit to be the parent of a daughter.

The Mosaic law authorizes a father to sell his daughter for a concubine

or mistress (euphemistically translated "maid servant"). God's

instructions respecting the thirty-two thousand captive Midianite

maidens impliedly sanction concubinage and prostitution.

These Bible teachings have been the cause of countless outrages

against the chastity of woman. John Wesley says:

"Almost all the soldiers in the Christian world ... have claimed,

more especially in time of war, another kind of liberty: that of

borrowing the wives and daughters of the men that fell into their

hands" (Wesley's Miscellaneous Works, Vol. III., p. 117).

Luther, drawing his morality from the Bible, gave concubinage his

indorsement:

"There is nothing unusual in princes keeping concubines; and although

the lower orders may not perceive the excuses of the thing, the more

intelligent know how to make allowance" (Consilium).

Luther might with equal truthfulness have said, "There is nothing

unusual in priests and preachers keeping concubines," and he might have

helped to confirm it by a few leaves from his own private history. In a

letter to his confidential friend, Spalatin, he confessed to numerous

adulteries.

God instructs his prophet Hosea to marry a prostitute. He subsequently

commands him to love and hire an adulteress (Hosea i, 2, 3; iii, 1, 2).

Christ forgave the woman taken in adultery, while his favorite female

companion was a reformed (?) prostitute. Referring to his female

ancestors, Dr. Alexander Walker, a Christian, says:

"It is remarkable that in the genealogy of Christ only four women

have been named: Tamar, who seduced the father of her late husband;

Rachab, a common prostitute; Ruth, who, instead of marrying one of her

cousins, went to bed with another of them, and Bathsheba, an adultress,

who espoused David, the murderer of her husband" (Woman, p. 330).

The early Christians were notorious for their adulteries. Dr. Cave, in

his "Primitive Christianity" (Part II., ch. v), says it was commonly

charged "that the Christians knew one another by certain privy marks

and signs, and were wont to be in love almost before they knew one

another; that they exercised lust and filthiness under a pretense

of religion, promiscuously calling themselves brothers and sisters,

that by the help of so sacred a name their common adulteries might

become incestuous."

Of the Carpocratians, who Dr. Lardner says "are not accused of

rejecting any part of the New Testament," Dr. Cave says: "Both men

and women used to meet at supper (which was called their love-feast),

when after they had loaded themselves with a plentiful meal, to prevent

all shame, if they had any remaining, they put out the lights, and

then promiscuously mixed in filthiness with one another" (Ibid).

In his Epistle to the Corinthians, Paul says: "It is reported commonly

that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not

so much as named among the gentiles" (1 Cor. v, 1).

It is an indisputable fact that the most notorious adulterers are

those whose profession makes them most familiar with the teachings

of the Bible, and compels them to accept its teachings as divine.

Obscenity.

I refuse to accept the Bible as a moral guide, and protest against

its being placed in the hands of the young, because its pages are

defiled with obscenity.

Aside from thousands of coarse and vulgar expressions contained in it,

there are at least a hundred passages so obscene that their appearance

in any other book would exclude that book from the mails and send

its publisher to prison. The United States courts have declared

parts of the Bible to be obscene. There are entire chapters, such as

the thirty-eighth chapter of Genesis, that reek with obscenity from

beginning to end.

In proof of the charge of obscenity, I refer you to the following:

Isaiah xxxvi, 12; Ezek. iv, 12-15; Gen. xix, 30-36; xxx, 1-16; xxxviii;

2 Kings xviii, 27; Lev. xv, 16-33; Job xl, 16, 17; 1 Kings xiv, 10;

Isaiah iii, 17.

That portions of the Bible are obscene and unfit to be read, is

admitted even by Christians. Noah Webster, a Protestant, edited an

expurgated edition of the Bible. In vindication of his work, he says:

"Many passages are expressed in language which decency forbids to be

repeated in families and in the pulpit."

The Rev. Dr. Embree, Methodist, of Kansas, in a speech before the

Topeka School Board advocating the reading of Bible selections in

the public schools of that city, recently said:

"I would not want the Bible read indiscriminately. I think some of

it unfit to be read by any one."

The Rev. Father Maguire, Catholic, in his debate with the

Rev. Mr. Greg, at Dublin, gave utterance to the following:

"I beg of you not to continue such a practice; it is disreputable. I

will ask Mr. Greg a question (and I beg of you, my brethren of the

Protestant church, to bear this in mind), I will ask him if he dare

to take up the Bible and read from the book of Genesis the fact of

Onan--I ask him will he read that? Will he read the fact relative to

Lot and his two daughters? Will he read these and many other passages

which I could point out to him in the Holy Bible, which I would not

take one thousand guineas, nay, all the money in the world, and read

them here to-day?"

Richard Lalor Shiel, M. P., and Privy Counselor to the Queen,

thus wrote:

"Part of the Holy Writings consist of history, and the narration of

facts of a kind that cannot be mentioned in the presence of a virtuous

woman without exciting horror. Shall a woman be permitted to read in

her chamber what she would tremble to hear at her domestic board? Shall

she con over and revolve what she would rather die than utter?"

And if unfit for the perusal of a matured woman, shall innocent

childhood be polluted by these vile, indecent tales?

CHAPTER XXXI.

INTEMPERANCE--VAGRANCY--IGNORANCE.

Intemperance.

I refuse to accept the Bible as a moral guide because it fosters the

evil of intemperance.

While the sacred books of Buddhists and Mohammedans, by forbidding

the use of intoxicating drinks, have contributed to make drunkenness

among these people disreputable and rare, the Bible, by encouraging

their use, has made intemperance in Christian countries frightfully

prevalent and almost respectable.

"Thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after,

for oxen or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink" (Deut. xiv,

26).

"Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto

those that be of heavy hearts. Let him drink and forget his poverty,

and remember his misery no more" (Prov. xxxi, 6,7).

"Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake"

(1 Tim. v, 23).

"Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry

heart, for God now accepteth thy works" (Eccles. ix, 7).

"Corn shall make the young men cheerful, and new wine the maids"

(Zech. ix, 17).

"They shall plant vineyards and drink the wine thereof" (Amos ix, 14).

"Wine that maketh glad the heart of man" (Ps. civ, 15).

"Wine which cheereth God and man" (Jud. ix, 13).

"In the holy place shalt thou cause the strong wine to be poured unto

the Lord for a drink offering" (Num. xxviii, 7).

Will that wing of the Prohibition army which accepts the Bible as

its guide inscribe these texts upon its banner?

As a reward for the Jews keeping the judgments of the Lord he was to

bless their wine (Deut. vii, 13).

Liberal giving to the Lord was to be rewarded with an abundance

of wine.

"Honor the Lord with thy substance, and with the first fruits of all

thine increase: so shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy

presses shall burst out with new wine" (Prov. iii, 9, 10).

One of the most direful calamities was a wine famine.

"Awake, ye drunkards, and weep; and howl, all ye drinkers of wine,

because of the new wine; for it is cut off from your mouth.... The

drink offering is cut off from the house of the Lord; the priests,

the Lord's ministers, mourn.... Gird yourselves and lament, ye priests

howl, ye ministers of the altar; come, lie all night in sackcloth,

ye ministers of my God; for ... the drink offering is withholden from

the house of your God" (Joel i, 5, 9, 13).

God's especial favorites had a weakness for wine. When he drowned

the world's inhabitants he saved Noah, knowing that as soon as the

waters subsided he would plant a vineyard, make wine, and become

intoxicated. When Sodom was destroyed the only righteous man he

found was that foul drunkard, Lot. When David made his celebrated

feast in honor of the Lord he gave to every man and woman a flagon

of wine. He kept some for himself and so merry did his heart become

that he "danced before the Lord with all his might."

Thus joyously sings Solomon: "I have drunk my wine with my milk [milk

punch]; eat, O friends! drink, yea, drink abundantly." In the morning

he sings another song: "Open to me ... my love ... for my head is

filled with dew." How many a wayward fellow like Solomon has risen

from the gutter, sorrowfully wended his way home, and serenaded his

sleeping spouse with that same melody!

When Solomon erected his temple to God he gave to his laborers "twenty

thousand baths [nearly 175,000 gallons] of wine" (2 Chron. ii, 10).

The Nazarite, it is claimed, was commanded to abstain from wine. Yes,

but only during the period of his separation. "After that the Nazarite

may drink wine" (Num. vi, 20).

God commanded Jeremiah to tempt with wine those who abstained from

its use:

"Go unto the house of the Rechabites and speak with them, and bring

them into the house of the Lord, into one of the chambers, and give

them wine to drink" (Jer. xxxv, 2).

Christ spoke as follows:

"John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine.... The

Son of Man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold a gluttonous

man and a winebibber" (Luke, vii, 33, 34).

This censure was evidently not unmerited. The first act in Christ's

ministerial career was to manufacture three barrels of wine for

a wedding feast; his last recorded act was a benediction upon the

wine cup.

Theology being no longer in demand, the Protestant clergy, contrary

to the teachings of the Bible, and the traditions of the church, now

find it popular and profitable to espouse the cause of temperance. But

in championing one rational virtue they employ two Christian vices,

hypocrisy and intolerance. The most inconsistent, the most uncharitable

opponents of the liquor traffic to-day are these fresh converts who

profess to be doing their master's will and who claim that his Word

is the advocate of total abstinence and prohibitory laws. With fierce

invective they declaim against the old God Bacchus, yet every anathema

they hurl at him will apply with equal justice to their God and Christ.

One of the most unscrupulous arguments ever adduced in support

of any cause is that now advanced by some Christian temperance

advocates to the effect that the wine sanctioned in the Bible was

not intoxicating. With the same ease that they declare that in the

Bible "black" means "white," that "hate" means "love," and "day"

means "age," they declare that Bible wine does not mean wine, but

unfermented grape juice.

The Rev. Dr. W. M. Thompson, Rev. William Wright, Rev. S. H. Calhoun,

Rev. C. V. A. Van Dyke, and other able Hebrew and Sanscrit scholars

of Western Asia, who have made the history and customs of its people

both ancient and modern a life study, affirm that such a thing as

non-intoxicating wine was unknown, that the unfermented juice of the

grape was never recognized as wine. Dr. Philip Schaff, the foremost

Bible scholar of this country, affirms the same:

"The wine of the Bible was no doubt pure and unadulterated.... It was

genuine and real wine, and, like all wine in use in grape-growing

countries, exhilarating. To lay down the principle that the use of

intoxicating drink as a beverage is a sin--per se--is to condemn the

greater part of Christendom, to contradict the Bible, and to impeach

Christ himself, who drank wine and made wine by miracle to supply

the marriage guests."

At the General Assembly of the Presbyterian church held at Belfast,

Ireland, in 1870, an exhaustive examination and discussion was given

this subject. The result was the adoption by an almost unanimous

vote of the following resolution offered by the Rev. Robert Wales,

Professor of Dialectic Theology, Belfast:

"As the wine used in the oblations of the Old Testament time at the

Passover and by our Lord Jesus Christ himself in the institution of the

supper was the ordinary wine of the country, that is, the fermented

juice of the grape, we cannot sanction the use of the unfermented

juice of the grape as a symbol in the ordinance."

That the sacramental wine used by the early Christians was

intoxicating, and that they were addicted to using it to excess at

the Lord's Supper, is admitted by Paul (1 Cor. xi, 20-34).

Referring to this subject, the Christian Register says: "We deplore

intemperance, and welcome every truthful argument against it, but the

argument founded on the non-intoxicating character of Bible wine is

a weak and diluted fallacy."

Vagrancy.

I refuse to accept the Bible as a moral guide because it encourages

poverty and vagrancy.

Jesus Christ was the panegyrist of poverty and the promoter of

vagrancy:

"Blessed be ye poor" (Luke vi, 20).

"But woe unto you that are rich" (Luke vi, 24).

"A rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. xix,

23).

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for

a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God" (Mark x, 25).

"Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth" (Matt. vi, 19).

When the judicious use of wealth is promotive of human happiness,

and when poverty is the source of so much misery and crime, such

teachings are not only false, but pernicious.

"Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall

drink; nor yet for your body what ye shall put on.... Behold the

fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather

into barns.... And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the

lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they

spin.... Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or,

What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?... The

morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto

the day is the evil thereof" (Matt. vi, 25-34).

To-day our land is infested with an army of tramps. Their skirmishers

are deployed along every highway; their points of attack are the

kitchen and the haymow; their text-book on military science is the

Sermon on the Mount. "They sow not, neither do they reap;" "They toil

not, neither do they spin." They beg and steal. These are Christ's

followers--the truest followers he has on earth to-day.

In the streets of our cities we see men clad in rags, idle, and

drunken, and penniless. We see them arrested for vagrancy, thrust into

prison, or made to labor for their bread. These are Christ's martyrs.

Poor tramp and vagrant! How you are "persecuted for righteousness'

sake!" Men despise you; the farmer drives you from his door; the social

economist racks his brain to devise a plan for your suppression;

state governments legislate against you; everywhere you are treated

as an outcast--and all because, taking the Bible for your guide,

you endeavor faithfully to conform to its teachings.

Ignorance.

I refuse to accept the Bible as a moral guide because it condemns

the use of reason and the acquisition of knowledge.

"Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat

of it" (Gen. ii, 17).

"She took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her

husband with her; and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were

opened" (iii, 6, 7).

"Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden" (23).

"He that believeth not shall be damned" (Mark xvi, 16).

For partaking of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, our parents

were banished from Paradise; for obeying the dictates of reason,

we are consigned to hell.

Education, physical, moral, and intellectual, is discouraged.

Bodily exercise profiteth little.--Paul.

Be not righteous overmuch.--Solomon.

Neither make thyself over wise.--Solomon.

Choice mottoes, the above, to hang up on the walls of the school-room!

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy" (Col. ii, 8).

"Knowledge puffeth up" (1 Cor. viii, 1).

"Thy wisdom and thy knowledge it hath perverted thee" (Isa. xlvii, 10).

"I gave my heart to know wisdom, and to know madness and folly; I

perceived that this also is vexation of spirit. For in much wisdom

is much grief; and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow"

(Ecles. i, 17, 18).

"If any man be ignorant let him be ignorant" (1 Cor. xiv, 38).

"The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God" (1 Cor. iii, 19).

"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge" (Prov. i, 7).

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of ignorance. This fear has

kept the world in intellectual bondage. It is a flaming sword that

priestcraft has placed in every highway of learning to frighten back

the timid searchers after truth.

"The clergy, with a few honorable exceptions," says Buckle, "have

in all modern countries been the avowed enemies of the diffusion of

knowledge, the danger of which to their own profession they, by a

certain instinct, seem always to have perceived."

The Bible, and the religion emanating from it, are the fruitful

parents of ignorance and idiocy. They demand a sacrifice of the very

attribute which exalts the man of sense above the idiot; they bid him

pluck out the eyes of Reason, and in their place insert the sightless

balls of Faith.

"Reason should be destroyed in all Christians," says Luther

(L. Ungedr. Pred. Bru., p. 106).

"One destitute of reason," is a phrase employed by Webster to define

the word "fool."

"We are fools for Christ's sake," exclaims Paul (1 Cor. iv, 10).

CHAPTER XXXII.

INJUSTICE TO WOMEN--UNKINDNESS TO CHILDREN--CRUELTY TO ANIMALS.

Injustice to Women.

I refuse to accept the Bible as a moral guide because it has degraded

woman.

The holy offices of wife and mother it covers with reproach. Its

teachings carried out, as they were during the centuries of Christian

rule, leave woman but two paths in which to tread--the one leading into

slavery, the other into exile. Servitude in the house of a husband,

or self-banishment into a convent--these are the sad alternatives

presented for her choice.

"Thy desire shall be to thy husband and he shall rule over thee"

(Gen. iii, 16).

"Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands" (Col. iii, 18).

"As the church is subject unto Christ so let the wives be to their

own husbands in everything" (Eph. v, 24).

"Let your women keep silence in the churches, for it is not permitted

unto them to speak, but they are commanded to be under obedience,

as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask

their husbands at home; for it is a shame for a woman to speak in

the church" (1 Cor. xiv, 34, 35).

"Ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands.... For after this

manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God,

adorned themselves, being in subjection to their own husbands; even

as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord" (1 Peter iii, 1-6).

"Let woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not

a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be

in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not

deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression"

(1 Tim. ii, 11-14).

Oh! the unspeakable outrage that woman has suffered because of that

old Jewish fable!

The teachings of the Bible respecting marriage are an insult to

every married woman. Christ discouraged marriage (Matt. xix, 10-12),

while a more despicable dissertation on marriage than Paul gives in

the seventh chapter of 1 Corinthians was never penned.

In contracting matrimonial alliances, woman's rights and choice are

not consulted. The father does his daughter's courting, and sells

or gives her to whom he pleases. A father is even allowed to sell

his daughter for a slave (Ex. xxi, 7). In the Decalogue the wife is

classed with slaves and cattle as a mere chattel.

Kidnapping is commanded for the purpose of obtaining wives.

"Therefore they [God's priests] commanded the children of Benjamin,

saying, Go and lie in wait in the vineyards; and see, and, behold, if

the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in dances, then come ye out

of the vineyards, and catch you every man his wife of the daughters

of Shiloh, and go to the land of Benjamin.... And the children of

Benjamin did so, and took them wives according to their number of

them that danced whom they caught" (Jud. xxi, 20-23).

The Levitical law makes motherhood a sin that can be expiated only

by offering a sin offering at the birth of every child. The degree

of sinfulness depends upon the sex of the child; giving birth to

a daughter being esteemed a greater sin than giving birth to a son

(Lev. xii).

The laws of the Bible in regard to divorce are most unjust. A husband

is permitted to divorce his wife if she displease him, while a wife

is not allowed to obtain a divorce for any cause whatever.

"When a man hath taken a wife, and marries her, and it come to pass

that she find no favor in his eyes, ... then let him write her a bill

of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house"

(Deut. xxiv, 1).

"When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord

thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken

them captive, and seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and

hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldst have her to thy wife; then

thou shalt bring her home to thine house.... And it shall be, if thou

have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will"

(Deut. xxi, 10-14).

Wives were compelled to suffer outrage for the sins of their husbands.

"Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out

of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes,

and give them unto thy neighbor, and he shall lie with thy wives in

the sight of this sun" (2 Sam. xii, 11).

"Their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished" (Is. xiii,

16).

"I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the

city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished"

(Zech. xiv, 2).

"Let their wives be bereaved of their children and be widows"

(Jer. xviii, 21).

The teachings of the Bible have been used by the church to keep woman

in a subordinate position.

"There is not a more cruel chapter in history," says Dr. Moncure

D. Conway, "than that which records the arrest by Christianity of the

natural growth of European civilization regarding woman. In Germany

it found woman participating in the legislative assembly, and sharing

the interests and counsels of man, and drove her out and away.... Even

more fatal was the overthrow of woman's position in Rome. Read the

terrible facts as stated by Gibbon, by Milman, and Sir Henry Maine;

read and ponder them, and you will see the tremendous wrong that

Christianity did to woman."

Even the priceless virtue of chastity, in the name of law and in the

name of the Bible, was trampled under foot. Mrs. Gage, in "Woman,

Church, and State," says:

"Women were taught by the church and state alike that the feudal lord,

or seigneur, had a right to them, not only against themselves, but as

against any claim of husband or father. The law known as Marchetta,

or Marquette, compelled newly-married women to a most dishonorable

servitude. They were regarded as the rightful prey of the feudal

lord from one to three days after their marriage.... France, Germany,

Prussia, England, Scotland, and all Christian countries where feudalism

existed, held to the enforcement of Marquette."

Respecting this law, Michelet writes: "The lords spiritual had this

right no less than the lords temporal. The parson, being a lord,

expressly claimed the first fruits of the bride" (La Sorcerie,

page 62).

In this country, while the most illiterate and depraved man is

clothed with the rights of a sovereign, the noblest woman is held in

a subordinate position; and from the Bible, priests and politicians

have procured the chains that hold her in subjection.

Referring to the Bible, America's greatest woman, Elizabeth Cady

Stanton, says: "I know of no other books that so fully teach the

subjection and degradation of woman" (Eighty Years and More).

Brave Helen Gardener says: "Every injustice that has ever been fastened

upon women in a Christian country has been 'authorized by the Bible'

and riveted and perpetuated by the pulpit" (Men, Women, and Gods,

page 14).

"Women are indebted to-day for their emancipation from a position of

hopeless degradation, not to their religion nor to Jehovah, but to the

justice and honor of the men who have defied his commandments. That

she does not crouch to-day where St. Paul tried to bind her, she

owes to the men who are grand and brave enough to ignore St. Paul,

and rise superior to his God" (Ibid, page 30).

George W. Foote of England says it will yet be the proud boast of

woman that she never contributed a line to the Bible.

Unkindness to Children.

I refuse to accept the Bible as a moral guide because its teachings

respecting the treatment of children are cruel and unjust.

It advocates the use of corporal punishment for children.

"Thou shalt beat him with the rod" (Prov. xxiii, 14).

"Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with

the rod he shall not die" (Ibid xxiii, 13).

"Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of

correction shall drive it far from him" (Ibid xxii, 15).

"The rod and reproof give wisdom" (Ibid xxix, 15).

It advocates capital punishment for children:

"If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey

the voice of his mother, and that when they have chastened him will

not hearken unto them; then shall his father and his mother lay hold

on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the

gate of his place.... And all the men of the city shall stone him

with stones that he die" (Deut. xxi, 18, 19, 21).

It advocates the indiscriminate and merciless slaughter of little

children:

"Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes"

(Isa. xiii, 16).

"Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God;

they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces"

(Hosea xiii, 16).

"As he [Elisha] was going up by the way, there came forth little

children out of the city, and mocked him.... And he turned back,

and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And

there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and

two children of them" (2 Kings ii, 23, 24).

It advocates the punishment of children for the misdeeds of their

parents.

"I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the

fathers upon the children" (Ex. xx, 5).

"I will stir up the Medes against them, ... their eye shall not spare

children" (Isa. xiii, 17, 18).

"I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your

children" (Lev. xxvi, 22).

David prays that the children of his adversaries may become vagabonds

and beggars; and Jeremiah, that the children of his enemies may perish

by famine.

God kills Bath-sheba's child:

"And the Lord struck the child that Uriah's wife bore unto David,

and it was very sick.... And it came to pass on the seventh day that

the child died" (2 Sam. xii, 15-18).

Poor babe! tortured and murdered for its parents' crime!

Cruelty to Animals.

I refuse to accept the Bible as a moral guide because it sanctions

and enjoins unkindness and cruelty to animals.

Portions of the Old Testament, and particularly those relating to

sacrifices, are calculated to foster a spirit of brutality, and

a total disregard for animal life. God revels in the blood of the

innocent. The offering of fruits made by Cain is rejected by him;

the bloody sacrifice of Abel is accepted.

Nearly the entire book of Leviticus is devoted to such laws as these:

"If he offer a lamb for his offering, then shall he offer it before

the Lord. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of his offering,

and kill it before the tabernacle of the congregation; and Aaron's

sons shall sprinkle the blood thereof round about upon the altar"

(Lev. iii, 7, 8).

"And if the burnt sacrifice for his offering to the Lord be of

fowls, then he shall bring his offering of turtle-doves, or of young

pigeons. And the priest shall bring it unto the altar, and wring off

his head, and burn it on the altar; and the blood thereof shall be

wrung out at the side of the altar" (Lev. i, 14, 15).

The minutest directions for conducting these bloody sacrifices come

from the lips of Jehovah himself, and are too brutal and disgusting

to repeat.

The number of animals sacrificed was incredible. At times whole

herds were killed. On one occasion Asa sacrificed 700 oxen and 7,000

sheep. David made an offering of 1,000 bullocks and 2,000 sheep. At

the dedication of the temple, 142,000 domestic beasts were sacrificed

by Solomon.

And this wholesale slaughter of innocent animals, we are told, was

highly pleasing to the Lord. But

"What was his high pleasure in

The fumes of scorching flesh and smoking blood,

To the pain of the bleating mothers, which

Still yearned for their dead offspring? or the pangs

Of the sad ignorant victim underneath

The pious knife?"

--Byron.

A God of mercy, it would seem, ought to protect the weaker orders of

his creation; but the God of the Bible manifests an utter disregard

for them. When the being created in his own image proved too true a

copy, and he wished to destroy it, he sent a deluge, "and all flesh

died that moved upon the earth." To wreak his vengeance upon Pharaoh,

he visited with disease and death his unoffending cattle. In times of

war, he ordered his followers to "slay both man and beast." Saul's

great transgression, the chief cause of his dethronement and death,

was that he saved alive some sheep and oxen instead of killing them

as God desired. David and Joshua, God's favorite warriors, houghed the

horses of their enemies, and thus disabled turned them loose to die.

We teach a child that it is wrong to rob the nests of birds. It opens

the Bible and reads:

"If a bird's nest chance to be before thee in the way in any tree,

or on the ground, whether they be young ones, or eggs, and the dam

sitting upon the young, or upon the eggs, thou shalt not take the

dam with the young; but thou shalt in any wise let the dam go, and

take the young to thee" (Deut. xxii, 6, 7).

Throughout Christendom "man's inhumanity to man" is only equaled by his

cruelty to the inferior animals. The Buddhist, who has not the Bible

for his guide, considers it a sin to harm the meanest creature. Even

the savage kills only what he needs for food, or such as threaten him

with danger. But the Christian, whose Bible gives him dominion over

the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, maims and murders

in pure wantonness, and after years of patient service, even turns

his beast of burden out to die of hunger and neglect.

For the sake of these dumb creatures, would that our world had less

theology, and more humanity; had fewer Moodys, and more Henry Berghs!

CHAPTER XXXIII.

TYRANNY--INTOLERANCE.

Tyranny.

I refuse to accept the Bible as a moral guide because it enjoins

submission to tyrants.

"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man, ... whether it be to

the king as supreme; or unto governors" (1 Pet. ii, 13).

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no

power but of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth

the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall receive to themselves

damnation" (Rom. xiii, 1, 2).

And these sentiments were uttered when a Nero sat upon the throne--when

Palestine was being crushed beneath the iron heel of despotism--when

brave and patriotic men were struggling for freedom.

The Bible has ever been the bulwark of tyranny. When the oppressed

millions of France were endeavoring to throw off their yoke--when

the Washingtons, the Franklins, the Paines, and the Jeffersons were

contending for American liberty--craven priests stood up in the pulpit,

opened this book, and gravely read: "The powers that be are ordained

of God; they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."

In the American Revolution every Tory was a Christian, and nearly

every orthodox Christian was a Tory. Writing in 1777, John Wesley says:

"I have just received two letters from New York.... They inform me

that all the Methodists there were firm for the government, and on

that account persecuted by the rebels" (Wesley's Miscellaneous Works,

Vol. III., page 410).

Referring to our Revolutionary fathers, Robert Dale Owen says:

"I know not what the private opinions of those sturdy patriots were,

who, in the old Philadelphia State House, appended their signatures

to the immortal document. But this I do know, that when they did so,

it was in defiance of the Bible; it was in direct violation of the

law of the New Testament.

"If a Being who cannot lie penned the Bible, then George Washington

and every soldier who drew sword in the Republic's armies for liberty

expiate, at this moment, in hell-fire, the punishment of their ungodly

strife! There, too, John Hancock and every patriot whose name stands

to America's Title Deed, have taken their places with the devil and

his angels! All resisted the power; all, unless God lie, have received

to themselves damnation" (Bacheler-Owen Debate, Vol. II., page 230).

From the first century to the twentieth--from Paul to Leo--these Bible

teachings have dominated the Christian world. Of the early Christian

Fathers, Lecky writes:

"The teaching of the early Fathers on the subject is perfectly

unanimous and unequivocal. Without a single exception, all who touched

upon the subject pronounced active resistance to the established

authorities to be under all circumstances sinful" (Rationalism in

Europe, Vol. II., page 136).

Jeremy Taylor, one of the greatest of modern divines, speaking not

for himself alone, but for all Christians, says:

"The matter of Scripture being so plain that it needs no

interpretation, the practice and doctrine of the church, which is

usually the best commentary, is now but of little use in a case so

plain; yet this also is as plain in itself, and without any variety,

dissent, or interruption universally agreed upon, universally practiced

and taught, that, let the powers set over us be what they will,

we must suffer it and never right ourselves" (Ductor Dubitantium,

Book III., chapter iii).

This has been the chief cause of Christian triumph and Christian

supremacy. It has secured for the church the adherence and support

of every tyrant in Christendom. Thomas Jefferson truly says:

"In every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to

liberty; he is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses

in return for protection to his own."

Writing of his country and his country's church, Macaulay says:

"The Church of England continued to be for more than 150 years the

servile handmaid of monarchy, the steady enemy of public liberty. The

divine right of kings and the duty of passively obeying all their

commands were her favorite tenets. She held these tenets firmly through

times of oppression, persecution, and licentiousness, while law was

trampled down, while judgment was perverted, while the people were

eaten as though they were bread" (Essays, Vol. I., page 60).

Intolerance.

I refuse to accept the Bible as a moral guide because its teachings

have filled the world with intolerance and persecution.

"If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter,

or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul,

entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which

thou hast not known, thou nor thy fathers: namely, of the gods of the

people which are round about you [that is, accept another religion]

... thou shalt not consent unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him;

neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him; but thou

shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him

to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people" (Deut. xiii, 6-9).

Kill your friend, kill your brother, kill your wife, kill your child,

for accepting another religious belief!

Did a merciful God inspire this prayer?

"Let his days be few; and let another take his office. Let his

children be fatherless, and his wife a widow. Let his children be

continually vagabonds, and beg; let them seek their bread also out of

their desolate places. Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and

let the strangers spoil his labor. Let there be none to extend mercy

unto him; neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children"

(Ps. cix, 8-12).

"In the literature of the world there is nothing more heartless,

more infamous, than the 109th Psalm."--Ingersoll.

Let me quote from the New Testament:

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that

believeth not shall be damned" (Mark xvi, 16).

"Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire" (Matt. xxv, 41).

"These shall go away into everlasting punishment" (Matt. xxv, 46).

"Cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched" (Mark

ix, 45).

These passages ought to consign to everlasting abhorrence the being

who uttered them, the book containing them, and the church indorsing

them. This dogma of endless punishment is the dogma of fiends,

the most infamous dogma that human lips have ever breathed! What

needless terror it has inspired! What misery it has caused! Think

of the millions of innocent children whose young lives it has filled

with gloom! This horrible nightmare of hell has strewn the pathway of

childhood with thorns where flowers should have been made to bloom;

it has filled the minds of children with fear and made them wretched

when their hearts should have been filled with joy; it has robbed

home of wife and mother, it has driven thousands of pure and loving

women to madness and despair. I had rather trace my descent to the

tiger or hyena than to the creation of a God who dooms his creatures

to eternal pain; and the time will come when the remembrance of the

theologians who have taught this hideous lie will provoke more shame

and pity than the ancestral apes do now.

"If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive

him not into your house" (2 John i, 10).

Amid the storms of a winter night, a traveler, perishing with cold

and hunger, knocks at your door and begs for food and shelter. You

interrogate him as to his religious belief, and finding that he is

not a member of your church you forbid him to enter. In the morning

when you discover his lifeless body by the roadside, how impressed

you will be with the transcendent beauty of Bible morals!

Paul preached a sermon on charity, and then wrote to the Galatians

as follows:

"If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have

received, let him be accursed" (Gal. i, 9).

From the same pen, too, came this sneaking, infamous hint:

"I would they were even cut off which trouble you" (Gal. v, 12).

What ghastly fruits these teachings have produced! We see earth

covered with the yellow bones of murdered heretics and scholars; we

see the persecutions and butcheries of Constantine, of Theodosius,

of Clovis, of Justinian, and of Charlemagne; we see the Crusades,

in which nearly twenty millions perish; we see the followers

of Godfrey in Jerusalem--see the indiscriminate massacre of men,

women, and children--see the mosques piled seven deep with murdered

Saracens--the Jews burnt in their synagogues; we see Coeur de Lion

slaughter in cold blood thousands of captive Saracens; we see the

Franks in Constantinople, plundering, ravishing, murdering; we see

the Moors expelled from Spain; we see the murder of the Huguenots

and Waldenses--the slaughter of German peasants--the desolation

of Ireland--Holland covered with blood; we witness Smithfield and

Bartholomew; we see the Inquisition with its countless instruments

of fiendish cruelty; we see the Auto-da-fé, where heretics, clad in

mockery, are led to torture and to death; we see men stretched upon

the rack, disjointed, and torn limb from limb; we see them flayed

alive--their bleeding bodies seared with red-hot irons; we see them

covered with pitch and oil and set on fire; we see them hurled headlong

from towers to the stony streets below; we see them buried alive; we

see them hanged and quartered; we see their eyes bored out with heated

augers--their tongues torn out--their bones broken with hammers--their

bodies pierced with a thousand needles; we see aged women tied to the

heels of fiery steeds--see their mangled and bleeding bodies dragged

with lightning speed over the frozen earth; we see new-born babes

flung into the flames to perish with their mothers, or with their

mothers sewed in sacks and sunk into the sea; in short, on every hand,

as a result of this book's teachings, we see hate, torture, death!

But, thanks to the brave Infidels who have gone before, you, Bible

moralists, can use these instruments of cruelty to silence heretics

to Christianity no more.

"Where are the hands which once for this foul creed,

'Mid flame and torture, made an Atheist bleed?

Gone--like the powers your fathers used so well

To send souls heavenward through the flames of hell.

And you, poor palsied creatures! you, ere long,

With them thrice cursed shall swell Gehenna's throng.

Your God is dead; your heaven a hope bewrayed;

Your hell a by-word, and your creed a trade;

Your vengeance--what? A mere polluting touch--

cripple striking with a broken crutch!"

CHAPTER XXXIV.

CONCLUSION.

Twenty crimes and vices--lying, cheating, stealing, murder, wars of

conquest, human sacrifices, cannibalism, witchcraft, slavery, polygamy,

adultery, obscenity, intemperance, vagrancy ignorance, injustice

to woman, unkindness to children, cruelty to animals, tyranny,

persecution--are, we have seen, sanctioned by the Bible. Scattering

this book broadcast over the land, making it the chief text-book of

the Sunday-school and, above all, placing it in our public schools

and compelling our youth to accept it as infallible authority,

is a monstrous wrong; and you who advocate it are the enemies

of virtue and the promoters of vice. James Anthony Froude says:

"Considering all the heresies, the enormous crimes, the wickedness,

the astounding follies, which the Bible has been made to justify,

and which its indiscriminate reading has suggested; considering that

it has been, indeed, the sword which our Lord said he was sending,

and that not the devil himself could have invented an implement more

potent to fill the hated world with lies and blood and fury, I think

certainly that to send hawkers over the world loaded with copies of

this book, scattering it in all places, among all persons, ... is

the most culpable folly of which it is possible for man to be guilty."

There are within the lids of this Bible a hundred chapters sanctioning

the bloodiest deeds in all the annals of crime; and this is the book

you wish to place in the hands of our sons! There are within the

lids of this Bible a hundred chapters which no modest woman can read

without her cheek becoming tinged with the blush of shame; and this

is the book you wish to place in the hands of our daughters! If you

delight to feast upon such carrion you have the right to do so, but

you have no right to thrust it down the throats of your neighbors. As

a Liberal, I concede to the Christian cuckoo the right to propagate

her species; but I protest against her laying her eggs in the secular

nest and having them hatched by the state.

I contend that the Bible does not present an infallible moral

standard, and I have given many valid reasons why it does not. I

expect the defenders of this book to complete the task that I have here

essayed. They will claim that the Bible is opposed to crime. They will,

no doubt, cite numerous passages in confirmation of this claim. Let

them do this. Then place the results of our labors side by side. This

will show that the Bible abounds with teachings that conflict. This

fact established, the dogma of its divinity must fall. And this is what

I am endeavoring to do--to tear this dogma from the human brain. Not

until this is done can we have a pure morality. So long as men's

minds are confused and corrupted by these conflicting and demoralizing

teachings, so long will immorality prevail. You cannot make men moral

while they accept as their moral guide a book which sanctions every

crime and presents as the best models of human excellence the most

notorious villains. You cannot make them moral by teaching them that a

lie is better for being called inspired, that a vice becomes a virtue

with age, that a dead rogue should be canonized and a live one killed.

Not until this dogma is destroyed can you appreciate what is

meritorious in the Bible. There are in it some noble precepts. It

contains along with the false much that is true; along with the bad

much that is good; but while you are compelled to accept all--the

true and the false, the good and the bad, as alike infallible, as

alike divine--it can be of no value to you.

You may contend that I mistake the meaning of what I have quoted from

this book. But the language is too plain to be mistaken. Do not tell

me that it states one thing and means another. This is, you affirm,

the word of your God. Is your God wanting in candor?

So far as the Bible is concerned, the criminal has as much to

support the justness of his crime as the Christian has to sustain

the truthfulness of his creed. The various doctrines of the church

are not upheld by stronger Scripture proofs than have been cited in

justification of the crimes that I have named.

Bible apologists tell us that it is only in this book that wrongdoers

confess and record their sins, and that this is evidence of its

divinity. Were this true we might say that the Bible is the only book

whose authors are so devoid of shame as to parade their sins. But this

claim is not true. It was not the sinners who wrote these accounts

of their sins any more than it is the criminals to-day who write and

publish the accounts of their crimes.

Bible lands, we are told, are more moral than other lands. This is

false. The morality of Pagan China and Japan, without the Bible,

is not inferior to that of Christian Europe with it. Modern Europe

with its partial rejection of the Bible is superior in morality

to medieval Europe with its full acceptance of it. The morals of

the people have improved in about the same ratio that their faith

in the book has declined. A further declension of faith will bring

a further improvement in morals. In Christian countries those who

have discarded its teachings are morally superior to those who still

accept them. It is the ignorant who are the most devout believers

in this book, and it is the ignorant who are the most immoral. The

intelligence and morality to be found in Christian lands are not the

results of Bible teachings, but exist in spite of them.

That some great and good men have commended the Bible as a moral

guide is true. These commendations are given wide publicity. But the

testimonials of these men are, for the most part, not the result of

careful reading and study. They have been inspired by the teachings of

childhood, by the sentiment that prevails around them, or by a perusal

of only the choicest portions of the book. These testimonials, too,

are mostly from men who, while expressing admiration for many of

its teachings, do not believe and do not profess to believe in its

divinity. Many of these testimonials are forgeries.

"If you discard the Bible, what," asks the Christian, "will you give

us as a moral guide?" Enter a public library blindfolded; take from

its shelves a volume at random, and you will scarcely select a worse

one. The book you select may not pertain to morals. It may not even

contain the word "moral." But neither does the Bible. Must we go to

the ignorant past for our morality? Does human experience count for

nothing? Have the most marvelous advances been made in every other

department of human knowledge during the past two thousand years

and none in ethical science? Read Bentham, Mill, and Spencer. Let

your children study Count Volney's "Law of Nature," and Miss Wixon's

"Right Living." These books are not infallible and divine, they are

fallible and human; but they are immeasurably superior to any books

that supernaturalists can offer. Not in Moses nor Jesus, not in the

Decalogue nor Sermon on the Mount, is there to be found a statement of

moral duties so just and so comprehensive as the following from Volney:

"What do you conclude from all this? I conclude from it that all the

social virtues are only the habitude of actions useful to society

and to the individual who practices them; that they all refer to the

physical object of man's preservation; that nature having implanted

in us the want of that preservation, has made a law to us of all

its consequences, and a crime of everything that deviates from it;

that we carry in us the seed of every virtue, and of every perfection;

that it only requires to be developed that we are only happy inasmuch

as we observe the rules established by nature for the end of our

preservation; and that all wisdom, all perfection, all law, all virtue,

all philosophy, consist in the practice of these axioms founded on

our own organization:--Preserve thyself; Instruct thyself; Moderate

thyself; live for thy fellow-men, that they may live for thee."

The Bible moralist would have us believe that from this book all

morality has been derived; that God is the author and the Bible the

revelation and sole repository of moral laws. But it is not from

Gods and Bibles that these laws have come. In the words of Tyndall,

"Not in the way assumed by our dogmatic teachers has the morality of

human nature been propped up. The power that has molded us thus far

has worked with stern tools upon a rigid stuff.... That power did

not work with delusions, nor will it stay its hands when such are

removed. Facts, rather than dogmas, have been its ministers--hunger,

shame, pride, love, hate, terror, awe--such were the forces, the

interaction and adjustment of which during the immeasurable ages of

his development wove the triplex web of man's physical, intellectual,

and moral nature, and such are the forces that will be effectual to

the end."

Accepting the Bible--not for what it is claimed to be, the word of

God, but for what it is, the work of man--I can excuse, in a degree,

the crude ideas of right and wrong and the laxity of morals that

prevailed among the people whose history it purports to record. The

age in which they lived, the circumstances that surrounded them,

must palliate, to some extent, their deeds and theories. But it is

humiliating to think that in these better times, illuminated by the

light of a glorious civilization, there are those who spurn the robes

of virtue that Reason in the loom of grave Experience has woven,

and who from the dark and musty closets of the past drag forth for

use the soiled and blood-stained garments that barbarians wore.

With this chapter our review of the Bible ends. We have examined

successively the authenticity of its books, the credibility of its

statements, and the morality of its teachings. The authenticity of the

Bible must be abandoned. It will be abandoned, and abandoned soon. Its

credibility, impaired by a knowledge of its lack of authenticity and

the exposure of its numberless errors, will be contended for awhile

longer. But this, in turn, will go. When its credibility has been

destroyed, and it is acknowledged to be mostly a volume of fables

and legends, priestcraft continuing to survive, the clergy, as a

dernier resort, will descant upon the divine lessons of morality

taught by these fables and legends. But the relentless iconoclasts

of criticism will break this image also, and the Bible as a moral

guide and religious authority will be laid away forever.

APPENDIX.

Arguments Against the Divine Origin and in Support of the Human Origin

of the Bible.

A celebrated theologian has used with much ingenuity and effect the

watch as an argument in support of the divine origin of the universe. I

have a watch. Like other watches it is not infallible. But supposing

that I should claim for it infallibility and divinity; that while

other watches are of human invention and workmanship, this particular

make of watches is the work of God. The claim would be deemed too

absurd for serious consideration. I would be regarded as a lunatic

or a jester. Now, it is no more absurd to claim infallibility and

divinity for a watch than it is to claim infallibility and divinity for

a book. Yet millions of people of recognized sanity and intelligence

profess to believe, and many of them do sincerely believe, that a book

called the Bible is divine. How do we account for this? It is simply

the result of centuries of religious education. I could have taken

my children and taught them that my watch is divine. Had I kept them

isolated as far as possible from other people, had I commanded them

to shun discussion, and forbidden them to reason about it, as the

clergy do in regard to the Bible, they would probably believe it. I

was taught that the Bible is divine. I believed it. But in a fortunate

hour I listened to the voice of Reason; I examined the claims of its

advocates; I read it; and the halo of holiness surrounding the old

book vanished.

As a supplement to my review of the Bible I shall present some

arguments, thirty-six in number, against the divine origin and

in support of the human origin of the Bible. The brevity and

incompleteness of many of them will, I admit, justify the conclusion

not proven. I have space for little more than a mere statement of

them. The evidence supporting them will be found in the preceding

chapters of this book.

In a discussion of this question the champion of the Bible is placed

at a tremendous disadvantage--is handicapped as it were--at the very

commencement by this fact: While both the advocates and opponents of

Bible divinity admit that man exists and has written books, it has

not been proven that a God even exists, much less that he has written

or inspired a book. But let us concede, for the sake of argument,

that there is a God; that he is all-powerful, all-wise, and all-just;

and that he can write or inspire a book. Is the Bible the work of

such a Being? It is not. The following are my arguments:

1. Its mechanical construction and appearance. The Bible is printed

with type made by man, on paper made by man, and bound in a volume

by man. In its mechanical construction and appearance it does not

differ from other books.

2. The character of its contents. The contents of this book consist of

thoughts--human thoughts--every thought bearing unmistakable evidence

of having emanated from the human mind. There is not a thought

expressed in the Bible, the meaning of which can be comprehended,

that is beyond the power of man to conceive. If it contains thoughts,

the meaning of which cannot be comprehended, they are not a revelation,

and are self-evidently human.

3. The manner in which its contents were communicated to man. These

thoughts are expressed in human language. The Bible originally

appeared, it is claimed, in the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek languages,

two of them obscure languages of Western Asia. The president of

the United States does not issue an important proclamation in the

Cherokee or Tagalese language, and the ruler of the universe would not

have issued a message intended for all mankind in the most obscure

languages of the world. Had he given a message to man he would have

provided a universal language for its transmission.

4. Lack of divine supervision in its translation into other

tongues. Failing to provide a universal language for its transmission,

God would at least have supervised its translation into other

languages. Only in this way could its inerrancy and divinity have

been preserved. Yet no divine supervision has been exercised over the

translators, the transcribers, and the printers of this book. Divine

supervision, it is admitted, was confined to the original writers.

5. Not given to man until at a late period in his existence. This is

an argument advanced by Napoleon Bonaparte. Napoleon rejected the

Bible. He said that if it had been given to man at the creation he

might have accepted it, but that its late appearance proved to him

that it was of human origin.

6. Not given as a guide to all mankind, but only to an insignificant

portion of it. Not only has the Bible been confined to a small period

of man's existence, it is nearly all addressed to one small race of

earth's inhabitants. While Christians affirm that it is a universal

message intended for all, its doctrines and ceremonies pertain to

the Jews. This is wholly true of the Old Testament, and, with the

exception of a few doubtful passages, true of the Four Gospels, the

chief books of the New Testament. Now, is it reasonable to suppose that

this great and just All-Father, as he is called, would for centuries

take into his special confidence and care a few of his children and

ignore and neglect the others?

7. It deals for the most part, not with the works of God, but with the

works of man. What man does and knows is not a divine revelation. Paine

says: "Revelation, therefore, cannot be applied to anything done upon

earth, of which man himself is the actor or witness; and consequently

all the historical and anecdotal part of the Bible, which is almost

the whole of it, is not within the meaning and compass of the word

revelation, and therefore is not the word of God."

8. But one of many Bibles. There are many Bibles. The world is divided

into various religious systems. The adherents of each system have their

sacred book, or Bible. Brahmins have the Vedas and Puranas, Buddhists

the Tripitaka, Zoroastrians the Zend Avesta, Confucians the five King,

Mohammedans the Koran, and Christians the Holy Bible. The adherents of

each claim that their book is a revelation from God--that the others

are spurious. Now, if the Christian Bible were a revelation--if it

were God's only revelation, as affirmed--would he allow these spurious

books to be imposed upon mankind and delude the greater portion of

his children?

9. Many versions of this Bible. Not only are there many Bibles in the

world, there are many versions of the Christian Bible. The believers

in a divine revelation have not been agreed as to what books belong

to this revelation. The ancient Jews, who are said to have sustained

more intimate relations with God than any other race, were not agreed

in regard to this. The accepted Hebrew version contains 39 books (22

as divided by the Jews), the Samaritan version contains but 6 books

(some copies 5); while the Septuagint version contains 50. The early

Christians were not agreed. The Syriac version of the New Testament

contains 22 books; the Italic 24 (some copies 25); the Egyptian 26;

the Vulgate 27. The Sinaitic and Alexandrian MSS. each contains 29

books, but they are not all the same. The Gothic version omitted four

books in the Old Testament. The Ethiopic omitted books in both the

Old and New Testaments which are now accepted, and included books

in both which are now rejected. The Bibles of the Roman Catholic,

of the Greek Catholic, and of the Protestant churches do not contain

the same books. This disagreement regarding the books of the Bible

is proof of their human origin.

10. Incompetency of those who determined the canon. If the Bible were

the word of God it would not have required the deliberations of a

church council to determine the fact. And yet the Christian canon

was determined in this manner; and it took centuries of time and

many councils to make a collection of books that was acceptable to

the church. Not until the close of the fourth century were all the

books of the Bible adopted.

It is commonly supposed that the members of these councils were men of

great learning and still greater honesty. On the contrary, they were

mostly men of little learning and less honesty. They were ignorant,

fanatical, and immoral. Their deliberations were characterized by

trickery, lying, mob violence, and even murder. Many of them, so far

from being able to read and critically examine the books of the Bible,

could not read their own names. Even the molders of their opinions

concerning the canon--Irenæus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria,

Jerome, and Augustine--were they living now, would be considered

very ordinary clay. The historical facts in regard to the formation

of the Bible, if generally known, would be sufficient to dispel all

illusions respecting its divinity.

11. Books belonging to this so-called revelation lost or

destroyed. There were many other Jewish and Christian writings for

which divinity was claimed and which Bible writers themselves declare

to be of as much importance and authority as those which still

exist. The transitory and perishable nature of these books proves

their human origin, and shows that while those that remain are more

enduring they are not immortal and imperishable, and hence not divine.

12. Different versions of the same book do not agree. There are a

hundred versions and translations of the books of the Bible. No two

versions of any book agree. The translators and copyists have altered

nearly every paragraph. The earlier versions alone contain more

than 100,000 different readings. The original text no longer exists

and cannot be restored. Every version, it is admitted, abounds with

corruptions. Now, to assert that a book is at the same time divine and

corrupt is a contradiction of terms. God, it is affirmed, is all-wise,

all-powerful, and all-just. If he is all-wise he knew when his work

was being corrupted; if he is all-powerful he could have prevented it;

if he is all-just he would have prevented it. This God, it is declared,

is everywhere and sees everything. He watches the sparrows when they

fall, and numbers the hairs of our heads. He knows the secrets of every

heart. If he made a revelation to his children, upon the acceptance

and observance of which depends their eternal happiness, and then

knowingly and wilfully allowed this revelation to be perverted and

misunderstood, he is not a just God, but an unjust devil.

13. The mutability of its contents. The alterations made by

transcribers and translators demonstrate the mutability of its

contents, and this disproves its divine character. To admit that man

can alter the work of God is to admit that human power transcends

divine power. If the thoughts composing the Bible were divine man

could not alter them.

14. The anonymous character of its books. If the Bible is to be

accepted even as a reliable human record its authors ought, at least,

to be persons of acknowledged intelligence and veracity. And yet

almost nothing is known of its authors. The authorship of fully fifty

books of the Bible is absolutely unknown. Its books are nearly all

either anonymous or self-evident forgeries. This is true of the most

important books. The Pentateuch we know was not written by Moses,

nor the Four Gospels by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Aside from

the anonymous character of the writings of the Bible, with a few

exceptions, they evince neither a superior degree of intelligence

nor a high regard for the truth.

15. Its numerous contradictions. If the Bible were divine there would

be perfect harmony in all its statements. One contradiction is fatal

to the claim of inerrancy and divinity. Now the Bible contains not

merely one, but hundreds of contradictions. Nearly every book contains

statements that are contradicted by the writers of other books. This

is especially true of the Four Gospels. The writers of these agree that

a being called Jesus Christ lived and died; but regarding nearly every

event connected with his life and death they disagree. Human discord,

and not divine harmony, dwells in its pages.

16. Its historical errors. If the Bible were divine its history would

be infallible. But it is not. It presents as historical facts the most

palpable fictions, and denies or misstates the best authenticated

truths of history. Referring to Bible writers, the eminent Dutch

divines, Drs. Kuenen, Oort, and Hooykaas, in their preface to "The

Bible for Learners," say: "As a rule, they concern themselves very

little with the question whether what they narrated really happened

so or not." Its history is fallible and human.

17. Its scientific errors. God, the alleged author of this book,

it is claimed, created the universe. He ought, then, to be familiar

with his own works. The writers of the Bible, on the contrary,

display a lamentable ignorance of the universe and its phenomena. The

Rev. Dr. Lindsay Alexander, orthodox Calvinist, in his "Biblical

Theology," referring to these writers, says: "We find in their writings

statements which no ingenuity can reconcile with what modern research

has shown to be scientific truth." The demonstrated truths of modern

science were unknown to them. They give us the crude ideas of primitive

man and not the infallible knowledge of an omniscient God.

18. Its alleged miracles. The Bible is filled with marvelous

stories. The sun and moon stand still; the globe is submerged with

water to the depth of several miles; rods are transformed into

serpents, dust into lice, and water into blood and wine; animals

hold converse with man in his own language; men pass through fiery

furnaces unharmed; a child is born without a natural father; the

dead arise from the grave and walk the earth again. These marvelous

stories--these miracles--are adduced to prove the divine origin of

the Bible. They prove its human origin. If these miracles prove the

divinity of the Bible, then nearly all the books of old are divine,

for they abound with these same miracles. If these stories be true,

if these miracles occurred, the laws of nature were arrested and

suspended. The laws of nature are immutable. If the laws of nature

are immutable they cannot be suspended. The laws of nature cannot be

suspended; they never have been suspended; these stories are false;

and being false, the Bible is not divine.

19. Its immoral teachings. If the Bible were of divine origin its moral

teachings would be divine. It would be what its adherents affirm it to

be, an infallible moral guide. But its moral teachings are not divine;

it is not an infallible moral guide. It contains, like other Bibles,

some moral precepts; but it also sanctions nearly every crime and

vice. War and murder, bigotry and persecution, tyranny and slavery,

demonism and witchcraft, adultery and prostitution, drunkenness and

vagrancy, robbery and cheating, falsehood and deception, are all

authorized and commended by this book. It cannot, therefore, be divine.

20. Its inferior literary character. If the Bible were the word

of God, as a literary composition it would be above criticism. It

would be as far superior to all other books as God is superior to

man. Its rhetoric would transcend in beauty the glorious coloring

of a Titian. Its logic would be faultless. The Bible is not such a

book. It contains some admirable pieces and these owe much of their

literary merit to the translators, appearing as our version did in

the golden age of English literature. As a whole it is far inferior to

the literature of ancient Greece and Rome; inferior to the literature

of modern Italy, of France, of Germany, and of England. If the Bible

be the word of God it is a long way from God up to Shakespeare.

21. Its writers do not claim to be inspired. Had the writers of the

Bible been inspired they would have known it and would have proclaimed

it. Had they claimed to be inspired it would not prove the Bible

to be divine, for like Mohammed, they might have been deluded, or,

like a more recent finder of a holy book, impostors. But they do not

even claim that their books are divine revelations. Some of these

books contain what purport to be divine revelations, but the books

themselves do not pretend to be divine. The only exception is the

book called Revelation, admittedly the most doubtful book of the Bible.

"All scripture is given by inspiration." Waiving the questions of

authenticity and correct translation, who wrote this? Paul. What was

the scripture when he wrote? The Old Testament, the Old Testament

alone. The writers of the Old Testament do not claim to be divinely

inspired. This is a claim made by the later Jews and by the early

Christians. Paul and the other writers of the New Testament do not

claim that their writings are divine. This, too, is a claim made by

others long after they were written.

The fact that the writers of the Bible do not believe and do not

assert that their books are of divine origin, that this claim was

first made many years after they were composed, by those who knew

nothing of their origin, is of itself, in the absence of all other

evidence, sufficient to demonstrate their human origin.

22. God has never declared it to be his word. The Bible does not,

as we have seen, purport to be the word of God. Nowhere, neither in

the book nor outside of it, has he declared it to be his revealed

will. It contains various messages, chiefly of local concern, which

he is said to have delivered to man; but the book, as such, is not

ascribed to him nor claimed by him.

23. Whatever its origin it cannot be a divine revelation to us. Even

supposing that the writers of the Bible had claimed to be inspired

and that these books really were a divine revelation to them, they

would not, as Paine justly argues, be a divine revelation to us. The

only evidence we would have of their divinity would be the claim of

the writer--a claim that any writer might make--a claim that even

an honest writer might make were he, like many religious writers,

the victim of a delusion.

24. A written revelation unnecessary. To affirm the necessity of a

written revelation from God to man, as Christians do, is to deny his

divine attributes and ascribe to him the limitations of man. If God

be omnipotent and omnipresent a written revelation is unnecessary. To

impute to him an unnecessary act is to impute to him an imperfection,

and to impute to him an imperfection is to impugn his divinity. We do

not write a communication to one who is present. Think of an infinite,

all-powerful, and ever-present God communing with his living children

through an obscure and corrupted message said to have been delivered

to a tribe of barbarians three thousand years ago!

25. Its want of universal acceptance. A divine revelation intended

for all mankind can be harmonized only with a universal acceptance

of this revelation. God, it is affirmed, has made a revelation to

the world. Those who receive and accept this revelation are saved;

those who fail to receive and accept it are lost. This God, it is

claimed, is all-powerful and all-just. If he is all-powerful he can

give his children a revelation. If he is all-just he will give this

revelation to all. He will not give it to a part of them and allow

them to be saved and withhold it from the others and suffer them to

be lost. Your house is on fire. Your children are asleep in their

rooms. What is your duty? To arouse them and rescue them--to awaken

all of them and save all of them. If you awaken and save only a part

of them when it is in your power to save them all you are a fiend. If

you stand outside and blow a trumpet and say, "I have warned them,

I have done my duty," and they perish, you are still a fiend. If

God does not give his revelation to all; if he does not disclose its

divinity to all; if he does not make it comprehensible and acceptable

to all; in short, if he does not save all, he is the prince of fiends.

If all the world's inhabitants but one accepted the Bible and there was

one who could not honestly accept it, its rejection by one human being

would prove that it is not from an all-powerful and an all-just God;

for an all-powerful God who failed to reach and convince even one of

his children would not be an all-just God. Has the Bible been given

to all the world? Do all accept it? Three-fourths of the human race

reject it; millions have never heard of it.

26. Non-agreement of those who profess to accept it. If the Bible

were the work of God there would be no disagreement in regard to its

teachings. Its every word would be as clear as the light of day. Yet

those who profess to accept it as divine are not agreed as to what

it means. In the Christian world are a hundred sects, each with a

different interpretation of its various teachings. Take the rite of

baptism. Baptism is enjoined by the Bible. But what is baptism? The

three leading Protestant denominations of this country are the Baptist,

the Presbyterian, and the Methodist. I ask the Baptist what constitutes

baptism, and he tells me immersion; I ask the Presbyterian, and he

tells me sprinkling; I ask the Methodist which is proper, and he

tells me to take my choice. Sectarianism is conclusive proof that

the Bible is human.

27. Inability of those who affirm both a human and a divine element

in it to distinguish the one from the other. Confronted by its many

glaring errors and abominable teachings, some contend that a part of it

is the work of man and a part the work of God. And yet they are unable

to separate the one from the other. If a hundred attempts were made by

them to eliminate the human from the divine no two results would be the

same. Their inability to distinguish this supposed divine element from

the human is proof that both have the same origin--that both are human.

28. The character of its reputed divine author. The Bible is an

atrocious libel on God. It traduces his character, and denies his

divinity. The God of the Bible is not this all-powerful, all-wise,

and all-just Ruler of the universe, but a creature of the human

imagination, limited in power and knowledge, and infinite only in

vanity and cruelty.

29. The belief of primitive Christians in its divinity not an immediate

conviction but a growth. Had the books of the Bible been divinely

inspired their divinity would have been recognized at once. When they

originally appeared they were believed and known to be the works of

man and accepted as such.

Referring to the Old Testament, Dr. Davidson says: "The degree of

authority attaching to the Biblical books grew from less to greater,

till it culminated in a divine character, a sacredness rising even

to infallibility" (The Canon of the Bible, p. 274).

Of the New Testament Dr. Westcott says: "It cannot, however, be

denied that the idea of the inspiration of the New Testament, in

the sense in which it is maintained now, was the growth of time"

(On the Canon of the New Testament, p. 55).

The admitted fact that these books were originally presented and

received as human productions, and that the idea of inspiration

and divinity was gradually and slowly developed by the priesthood,

is conclusive proof that they are of human and not of divine origin.

30. Its acceptance by modern Christians the result of religious

teaching. In India the people believe that the Vedas and other sacred

books or Bibles are divine. Why do they believe it? Because for a

hundred generations they have been taught it by their priests. The

Turks believe that the Koran came from God. They believe it because

for twelve centuries this has been their religious teaching. For nearly

two thousand years Christian priests have taught that the Holy Bible is

the word of God. As a result of this the masses of Europe and America

believe it to be divine. Each generation, thoroughly impregnated with

superstition, transmitted the disease to the succeeding one and made

it easy for the clergy to impose their teachings on the people and

perpetuate their rule. The belief of Christians in the divinity of

the Bible, like the belief of Hindoos in the divinity of the Vedas,

and of Mohammedans in the divinity of the Koran, is the result of

religious teaching.

The ease with which a belief in the divine character of a book

obtains, even in an enlightened age, is illustrated by the inspired

(?) books that have appeared in this country from time to time,

and for several of which numerous adherents have been secured. About

seventy-five years ago a curious volume, called the Book of Mormon,

made its appearance. A few impostors and deluded men proclaimed its

divinity. A priesthood was established; Mormon education and Mormon

proselytism began their work, and already nearly a million converts

have been made to the divinity of this book.

Dr. Isaac Watts says: "The greatest part of the Christian world can

hardly give any reason why they believe the Bible to be the Word of

God, but because they have always believed it, and they were taught so

from their infancy." Really the entire Christian world--pope, bishop,

priest, and layman--the learned and the unlearned--can give no other

valid reason.

Profoundly true are these words of the historian Lecky: "The

overwhelming majority of the human race necessarily accept their

opinions from authority. Whether they do so avowedly, like the

Catholics, or unconsciously, like most Protestants, is immaterial. They

have neither time nor opportunity to examine for themselves. They

are taught certain doctrines on disputed questions as if they were

unquestionable truths, when they are incapable of judging, and every

influence is employed to deepen the impression. This is the origin

of their belief. Not until long years of mental conflict have passed

can they obtain the inestimable boon of an assured and untrammeled

mind. The fable of the ancient is still true. The woman even now sits

at the portal of life, presenting a cup to all who enter in which

diffuses through every vein a poison that will cling to them for

ever. The judgment may pierce the clouds of prejudice; in the moments

of her strength she may even rejoice and triumph in her liberty;

yet the conceptions of childhood will long remain latent in the

mind to reappear in every hour of weakness, when the tension of the

reason is relaxed, and when the power of old associations is supreme"

(History of Rationalism, Vol. II., pp. 95, 96).

Schopenhauer says: "There is in childhood a period measured by six,

or at most by ten years, when any well inculcated dogma, no matter how

extravagantly absurd, is sure to retain its hold for life." Considering

the impressionable character of the immature mind, and how nearly

impossible it is to eradicate the impressions of childhood, the

wonder is not that so many believe in the divinity of the Bible,

unreasonable as the belief is, but rather that so many disbelieve it.

31. An article of merchandise. Bibles are manufactured and sold just as

other books are manufactured and sold. Some are printed on poor paper,

cheaply bound, and sold at a low price; while others are printed on

the best of paper, richly bound, and sold at a high price. But all

are sold at a profit. The publisher and the book seller, or Bible

agent, derive pecuniary gain from their publication and sale. It

may be urged that the Bible can be obtained for the asking, that

millions of copies are gratuitously distributed. But this is done

in the interest of Christian propagandism. Nearly all religious,

political, and social organizations, to promote their work, make a

free distribution of their literature.

The printing and selling of Bibles is as much a part of the publishing

business as the printing and selling of novels. One of the leading

publishing houses of this country is that of the American Bible

Society. Wealthy and deluded Christians have been successfully

importuned to contribute millions to this Society. Directly or

indirectly the clergy reap the harvest, leaving the gleanings to

the lay employees, many of whom labor at starvation wages. In Great

Britain the crown has claimed the sole and perpetual right to print

the Bible (A. V.). For monetary or other considerations her kings have

delegated this right to publishers who have amassed fortunes from its

sale. Twenty years ago Bible publishing was characterized as the worst

monopoly in England. If the Bible were divine God would not allow it

to be used as merchandise. It would be as free as light and air.

32. A pillar of priestcraft. Not only is the Bible printed and sold

like other books, but its so-called divine teachings themselves are

used as merchandise. There are in Christendom half a million priests

and preachers. These priests and preachers are supported by the

people. Even the humble laborer and the poor servant girl are obliged

to contribute a portion of their hard earnings for this purpose. In

this country alone two thousand million dollars are invested for their

benefit; while two hundred million dollars are annually expended for

their support. For what are these men employed? To interpret God's

revelation to mankind, we are told. An all-powerful God needing an

interpreter! According to the clergy, God though omnipresent has had to

send a communication to his children, and though omnipotent he cannot

make them understand it. Those ignorant of other tongues and unable

to make known their wants require interpreters. The various Indian

tribes employ them. For the sake of gain these men degrade their God

to the level of an American savage, representing him as incapable of

expressing his thoughts to man, and representing themselves as the

possessors of both human and divine wisdom and authorized to speak

for him.

These Bibles are simply the agents employed by priests to establish

and perpetuate their power. They claim to be God's vicegerents

on earth. As their credentials they present these old religious

and mythological books. These books abound with the marvelous and

mysterious--the impossible and unreasonable--and are easily imposed

upon the credulous. If the contents of a book be intelligible

and reasonable you can not convince these people that it is other

than natural and human; but if its contents be unintelligible and

unreasonable it is easy to convince them that it is supernatural and

divine. Smith's Bible Dictionary says: "The language of the Apostles

is intentionally obscure." Of course; if it were not obscure there

would be no need of priests to interpret it, and what is Scripture

for if not to give employment to the priests?

We are triumphantly told that the Bible has withstood the assaults of

critics for two thousand years. But as much can be said of other sacred

books. Any business will thrive as long as it is profitable. Bibles

will be printed as long as there is a demand for them; and there

will be a demand for them as long as priests do a lucrative business

with them. Considering their abilities the vendors of the Gospel

are among the best paid men in the world to-day. The wealth of men

and the smiles of women are bestowed upon them more lavishly than

upon any other class. There are thousands in the ministry enjoying

comfortable and even luxurious livings who would eke out a miserable

subsistence in any other vocation.

33. Its advocates demand its acceptance by faith rather than by

reason. In the Gospels and in the Pauline Epistles, the principal

books of the New Testament, Christ, the reputed founder, and Paul, the

real founder of the Christian religion, both place religious faith,

i. e., blind credulity, above reason. This evinces a lack of divine

strength and is a confession of human weakness.

Modern advocates of the Bible in presenting the dogma of divine

inspiration ask us to discard reason and accept it by faith. In the

affected opinion of these men, to examine this question is dangerous,

to criticise the Bible is impious, and to deny or even doubt its

divinity is a crime. What is this but a tacit acknowledgment that

the faith they wish us to exercise is wanting in themselves? This

condemnation of reason and commendation of credulity is an insult

to human intelligence. A dogma which reason is obliged to reject,

and which faith alone can accept, is self-evidently false; and its

retention is not for the purpose of supporting a divine truth, but

for the purpose of supporting a human lie.

34. The refusal of its advocates to correct its acknowledged

errors. That the clergy are controlled by mercenary motives rather

than a love of truth is attested by the fact that they continue to

teach the admitted errors of the Bible. Our Authorized version, it is

conceded by Christian scholars, contains hundreds of errors. That the

Revisers corrected many of these errors is admitted. Yet the clergy

cling to these errors and refuse to accept a corrected text. The

principal reasons assigned for retaining the Old version instead of

adopting the New are these: 1. The English of three hundred years

ago possesses a certain charm which distinguishes the Bible from more

modern works and secures for it a greater reverence. 2. Its division

into chapters and verses renders it more convenient. 3. The adoption

of the New would expose the errors of the Old, suggest the possible

fallibility of the New, and sow the seeds of doubt. Thus expediency

prompts them to teach the acknowledged errors of man in preference

to what they claim to be the truths of God. This proves the human

character of the Bible and the insincerity of its professed exponents.

35. Its authority maintained by fraud and force. For sixteen hundred

years--from the time that Constantine, to gain a political advantage

over his rivals, became a convert to the Christian faith--corruption

and coercion have been the predominant agents in maintaining its

supremacy. Fagot, and sword, and gun, and gibbet, and rack and

thumbscrew, and every artifice that cunning and falsehood could devise,

have been used to uphold the dogma of this book's divinity. To-day,

in nearly every nation of Europe, the powers of the state are employed

to compel allegiance to it. And in this free Republic, everywhere, with

bribe and threat, the authorities are invoked to force its bloody and

filthy pages into the hands of innocent school girls to pollute with

superstition, lust, and cruelty their young and tender minds. These

deeds of violence, these pious frauds, these appeals to the civil

powers, all prove it to be the work of man and not the word of God.

36. The intelligence of the world for the most part rejects it. If

the Bible were divine the wise would be the best qualified to realize

and appreciate the fact; for while all may err the judgment of the

intelligent is better than the judgment of the ignorant. In Christendom

the ignorant nearly all believe the Bible to be the infallible word

of God, every verse of which is to be accepted literally. A more

intelligent class reject the objectionable portions of it, or give to

them a more rational and humane interpretation. Those of the highest

intelligence--the great leaders of the world in national affairs, in

the domain of literature, in science and philosophy, and in Biblical

and religious criticism--the Washingtons and Lincolns, the Franklins

and Jeffersons, the Fredericks and Napoleons, the Gambettas and

Garibaldis; the Shakespeares and Byrons, the Goethes and Schillers,

the Carlyles and Emersons, the Eliots and de Staëls; the Humboldts

and Darwins, the Huxleys and Haeckels, the Drapers and Tyndalls, the

Comtes and Spencers; the Humes and Gibbons, the Voltaires and Renans,

the Bauers and Strausses, the Paines and Ingersolls--all these reject

its divinity. A Gladstone is an anomaly.

Dr. Watson of Scotland gives frank expression to a fact of which

his fellow clergymen are fully cognizant, but which they are loth

to admit. He says: "The great, and the wise, and the mighty, are not

with us. These men, the master minds, the imperial leaders among men

are outside our most Christian church."

The ignorant suppose that the intelligent accept the Bible; because

the intelligent, dependent in a large degree upon the ignorant,

and knowing that of all passions religious prejudice and hatred are

the worst, do not care to arouse their antagonism by an unnecessary

avowal of their disbelief. This is especially true of men in public

life. But these men think; and to their intellectual friends they talk.

In his "History of the Bible," Bronson C. Keeler says: "The only men

distinguished for their learning who now believe it to be the inspired

word of God, are the men who are, either directly or indirectly, making

their living out of it." Do these learned divines themselves believe

it? Nearly every intelligent clergyman entertains and confidentially

expresses opinions regarding the Bible which he dare not proclaim

from the pulpit. But master and slave are alike growing weary--the

master of his duplicity, the slave of his burden. Emancipation for

both is approaching. To-day the clergy smile when they meet; some

day they will laugh outright, this stupendous farce will be ended,

and man will be free.